營利事業所得稅課稅爭訟問題之研究-以臺北高等政法院判決為對象

本研究透過臺北高等行政法院判決的蒐集，針對提起行政訴訟的營利事業進行研究分析，並整理出常見課稅爭訟的爭點，分為稅務法令面、查核稽徵面及納稅人申報面三方面加以探討，最後將問題面為稅務法令面之判決，彙總、整理實務上的見解及臺北高等行政法院判決之理由，俾對目前稅制、相關稅務法令修正及執行尺度提出有效的改善建議，並作為稅捐稽徵機關稅務人員審理租稅行政救濟案件之參考。本研究依據所蒐集的變數，計算基本?述統計量，分為爭訟案件基本面、爭訟案件判決面及爭訟案件訟源面三方面加以分析。並將爭訟案件訟源面分析之結果其問題面為稅務法令面之判決，彙總、整理實務上的見解及臺北高等行政法院判決之理由。本研究提出下列建議：一、為減少不必要的爭訟，稅捐稽徵機關引用相關法條據以核課時，不應拘泥於法條字句的文義，應多給納稅義務人說明解釋的機會，並須考量「證據替代性」層面；而就營利事業而言，最保險的方法即是建立一套完整、健全的會計制度，以提供具「證據力」的帳簿表單。二、成立租稅專業法庭，由具備會計與租稅專業學識背景的法官審理租稅行政救濟案件，除可減輕一般行政法院法官的業務壓力之外，對於案件實質面的審理，應可比目前更加深入，亦可提昇品質及效率。三、債券前手息案件，應回歸稅制從個人與金融業者規避之「所得」著手，確定規避所得歸屬，依法補課稅負，並對相關法令缺失加以修正。四、審核研究與發展支出案件，可借助瞭解各產業技術的專家參與，亦可採營利事業從事研究發展計劃須向稅捐稽徵機關事先報備的方式，並由稅捐稽徵機關於營利事業的研究發展計劃進行中，派員實地瞭解研究發展計劃進行的情形。五、營利事業所得稅查核準則第五十八條宜適度修正，將會計制度健全之條件放寬，以免稅務人員流於形式之查核。而對製造業提出之原物料耗用情形，建議可以以會計師查核簽證報告為重要參考。

關鍵字

營利事業所得稅；課稅爭訟

並列摘要

Abstract Through the collection of the judgements of the Taipei High Administrative Court , this research analyzes administrative litigation by private enterprise and refines it down to the most frequently occurring issues. These issues are mainly in the areas of disputes based in tax law; investigation and examination; or tax reporting. Furthermore, this research also gathers the practical suggestions and the reasons of final sentencing from the court and concludes advice to improve the current tax system legislation and its execution. Hopefully this will offer some references for tax officers to employ in their proceedings with tax disputes. This research is in accordance with the variables of collection, and essential statistics have been computed. We can separate these into three parts to analyze; the fundamentals of disputed cases; the judgment of disputed cases; and the origin of disputed cases. Among these three parts, we took the result of the disputed case, concentrating especially on the origin, and identified the sentences with connections to tax law and concluded practical advice and the reasons for final pronouncements of the court. These suggestions are : 1. To lessen unnecessary disputes, when the Taxation Office cites the relative laws to check and ratify, we have to give the taxpayers more opportunity to explain and to consider the layers of evidence substitution not only to stand on points of the words and sentence of laws. According to enterprise, the safest way is to build up a set of integrated and well organized accounting systems in order to provide accounts which contain the evidence. 2. To establish the Land Tax and Other Levies Enterprise Court, it is better that the judiciary possess the background of accounting and Land Tax and Other Levies Enterprise to judge the administration of Land Tax and Other Levies Enterprise. So not only we can alleviate the pressure of affair from general judiciary of the court, but also can raise the quality and effectiveness of legal cases when we judge even more closely than before. 3. The case of bond or debenture should regress the tax system from the earnings of the individual and finance field that they evade. We have to check those who evade declaration of their income then make up the taxes in conformity with a law. Of course, we need to amend the deficit of the relative laws. 4.To verify the case of R&D expenditure, we can have the aid of specialists, who understand well different fields. Also we can resolve that if the enterprise is engaged in the R&D project that it has to inform to the Taxation Office in advance, and during the proceeding of R&D project the Taxation Office must to get to know the real situation. 5. The fifty-eight statute of Examination Rules of the Income Tax Act needs to be revised in an appropriate way. To loosen or relax restrictions the condition of the well-organized accounting system to avoid the taxation personnel just examine by form. According to the manufactures to address the problem that concerns the using of raw, we suggest that the report from the chartered accountant can be the essential information.